Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
Railroads Struggle to Deliver Coal to Utilities

Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote]QUOTE: Originally posted by Murphy Siding [quote]QUOTE: Originally posted by futuremodal Murphy, I think you will understand this: The decommissioned power plants were replaced by newer power plants. The abandoned rail lines were not replaced by newer rail lines. Comprende muchacho?[/quote] Similar to how the traffic from unprofitable rail lines was replaced by traffic on other lines, and gasp! highways? I see the similarities, even if you don't.[/quote] So you're sure that traffic from so-called unprofitable rail lines (a debatable point in and of itself) went to other lines? Sure, some went to highways, but isn't that what we're trying to prevent? Not to mention manufacturing that has moved overseas, not to mention production facilities that just shut down, period? What you are missing from the power plant analogy is that the power plants that were shut down tended to be smaller, e.g. lower economies of scale, and were replaced by larger power plants, most of the time by the same utility. The utilities didn't just "cash out" the asset to sex up the balance sheet like the railroads did ("Wow, look at our present cash flow! We railroad CEO's deserve a big fat bonus, isn't that right all you stockholders?"). Subsequently, if the railroads had acted like the utilities, they would have replaced the abandoned lines with newer more modern trackage. They didn't, ergo the comparison is not apt. [quote]QUOTE: [quote]QUOTE: And I never said all abandoned rail lines should have been saved. We talked about that before, not to long ago. You have either a very poor memory, or a very disingenuous tact for trying to denegrate folks such as I. Which is it? [/quote] [(-D][(-D][(-D] It must be poor memory, or trying to hit a moving target. As far as the disingenuous tract,well, I don't think so. I did have chilie for dinner last night, though, so maybe that's part of the problem?[;)] I did go back and look. Sure enough, you did provide info on two current rail lines. As you keep refering back to past abandonments that you think railroads made in error, I keep thinking that they did what made sense at the time. So what abandonded lines, (other than the Milwaukee Road, I'll give you that one, as we all know the feelings of everybody on that one)are you talking about? [/quote] It's not just about abandonments, it's about reduced trackage system wide, including the loss of double track portions, sidings, et al. It's also about lines that were bled dry (e.g. the profits from the line were not returned for the lines upkeep), then when the cost of getting the line back to decent standards became so extreme the railroads tried to hardball steep rate hikes ostensibly for the "true cost" of getting the line back into shape. (As if the revenues from the new steep rate hikes would also go to actually rehabbing the line and not sent back east for padding the CEO's bonus check!) You mention the Milwaukee PCE. Well, portions of that line are actually under the auspices of a "second chance abandonment." After the Milwaukee pulled out, portions of the PCE were still kept by certain entities for operational usage. BN bought the Snoqualmie Pass portion with it's 0.7% west bound grade and 1.7% eastbound grade, but then decided that the ol' Stampede Pass line was *better* with it's 2.2% grades and reverse curves on both sides of the hill. I also believe BN originally bought the Lind to Ellensburg portion as well, and gave that up to the State for a rail trail. I mentioned the Modoc line as an alternate for UP's OSL. How about the BNSF's Great Falls to Helena line, still intact except for a few washouts, but hasn't been used in a decade even though it is intregal as a part of the I-15 rail corridor from Edmonton to Los Angeles. Yes, there's lot's of NAFTA traffic between Alberta and SoCal, but it all goes via the I-5 corridor, which is at max capacity (e.g. the UP and BNSF are having to turn down business - where does that business go? Truck, overseas, or shut down.) While we're in Montana, how about the original GN line between Havre and Great Falls? Now it's just two truncated branchlines, but it was a viable alternate to Marias Pass. Now, the BNSF is choked between Shelby and Sandpoint, while MRL still has capacity, but no High Line trains can make it onto MRL since the line was torn out and the GF to Helena line embargoed. We've talked about the chokepoint through Spokane. Once there were three separate mainlines through town, now down to one. Yeah, we all know it was due to Expo 74, but the railroads at the time seemed almost happy to give it all away. They could have said no, they had the ROW first, probably could have forced the Expo folks to accomodate the UP line into the park theme (which would have been AWESOME!), maybe consolidate the GN and UP lines since the GN line was in the heart of the Expo park. I've mention the local lines that were severed in response to the creation of the slack water ports on the Snake River. BN at first spent a good chunk of money upgrading the line from Marshall to Lewiston (once a viable secondary line), then changed their minds and embargoed the line from Moscow to Arrow (near Lewiston). Abracadabra, a viable regional line with new rails and ballast was reduced to a dead end branchline, and it's value subsequently went down to near zero. Predicably, BN sold the line to WATCO, who then conned the State of Washington into buying the remaining portion, then WATCO decides to give up service on the line anyway at BNSF's behest. BN once had the NP line from Seattle to British Columbia as an alternative to the ex-GN line along the Puget Sound shoreline. Well, the shoreline is enough for that Canadian traffic, we'll tear out chunks of the NP line. Now BNSF is stuck with only the shoreline for Vancouver to Seattle traffic. When will that line be at capacity (if it isn't already?) How about the Cowboy Line? I am not sure if it is still all there or not, I only know that DM&E runs the portion near Chadron. Yet how much would that line be worth as an alternative coal hauling line to the east? Okay, so you say how about those "unprofitable" branch lines that hauled grain? Well, I know of a dozen or so such lines within a 100 miles of my abode, wherein folks actually made a bid for such lines, usually at or above the ostensible scrap value stated by the railroad, but the railroad would always turn down the potential buyers. Gee, free money, and keeping a client base to boot! No go, go figure. Other lines did mangage to obtain "permission" for someone else to buy it, then the buyers would end up not getting car orders in a timely manner, and subsequently would give up on the line altogether. Or it would be a local government entity that would either unsuccessfully bid for a line, or they'd manage to buy it with all the restrictive caveats, then still wouldn't get even the minimally expected level of service. Who wants to buy a line if the Class I connection won't even provide rudimentary service? That's just a partial list from the PNW and the Northern Tier that I know of. It should be enough for you to rescind your view that all such lines were unprofitable and thus deserving of abandonment.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag